At a recent conference held in London by Israel’s longest-running newspaper, Haaretz, publisher Amos Schocken, known for his critical stance on Israel’s treatment of Palestinians, spoke out about the Palestinians, whom Israel defines as terrorists. actually argued that: freedom fighters. Schocken also called for sanctions to be imposed on the Israeli leadership, alleging that Israel runs a brutal apartheid regime against the Palestinian people.
His words shocked many in Israel, where people continue to grieve over the Oct. 7, 2023 terrorist attack in which Hamas killed 1,200 Israelis. In response, the Israeli government announced that it would suspend all government advertising in newspapers and ban government agencies from commenting in the papers.
This is not the first time Haaretz, which accounts for only 5% of Israel’s newspaper circulation, has caused outrage in the domestic market. In a 2013 article, reporter Amira Hass justified stoning Jews in the West Bank, saying, “Throwing stones is the birthright and duty of anyone under foreign rule.” I wrote.
In the same year, Haaretz journalist Gideon Levy called for a boycott of the state of Israel, and in 2017 his colleague Yossi Klein argued that Israel’s national religious community was more dangerous than Hezbollah.
His op-ed caused a huge uproar at the time, prompting Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others to demand an apology from Haaretz.
Haaretz was founded in 1919, 29 years before Israel was established as a Jewish state. Initially, this broadsheet was identified with the mainstream of the Zionist movement, and by the early 1930s it had become the most widely distributed newspaper (yishuv) in the Jewish community.
In 1936 Haaretz was acquired by the Schocken family. Under the leadership of Gershom Schocken (father of Amos), the paper began to adopt liberal positions close to those of general Zionists, and decades later became part of the political bloc that would form the Likud Party.
Schocken himself also served as a member of Parliament for the Progressive Party from 1955 to 1959. The Progressive Party was a centrist party active in the 1950s that eventually merged with Menachem Begin’s Hert party, which led to Begin founding Likud in 1973.
Under Schocken’s control, Haaretz became the opposition newspaper of David Ben-Gurion and Golda Meir’s party, Mapai (Workers of the Land of Israel Party), which became the dominant party in the Knesset after the establishment of the state of Israel.
Even back then, Mr. Haaretz was known for making controversial statements. A series of articles published by the newspaper in 1949 called for a reduction in immigration, arguing that Jews from North African countries were a primitive people who could not be properly integrated into Israeli society.
protect democracy
These days, Haaretz is on the very left of the political spectrum. But in the 1960s and 1970s, most of the paper’s reporters were considered hawks. In an article published in November 1973 under the heading “Illusions of Peace”, Schocken ruled out the possibility of withdrawing from the territories occupied in the six-day war.
In the same year, an article by Amnon Rubinstein, who later served as a minister and member of parliament for the left-wing Meretz party, headlined “There are no more pigeons”, legitimately argued that the principle of “territoriality for peace” no longer exists.
EPA-EFE/Menahem Kahana/Pool
Haaretz’s line began to change after the 1982 Lebanon War. The paper called for an immediate withdrawal from Lebanon and accused then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Defense Minister Ariel Sharon of waging a “war of deceit” in Lebanon. This led to a series of subscription cancellations by Haaretz readers who did not like the paper’s new direction.
Haaretz has long supported the left-wing Meretz party. Earlier this year, the party hailed the merger of Meretz and Labor as a “blueprint for how the left and center can resist the tide of authoritarian nationalism.”
Critics say that by boycotting Haaretz, Netanyahu’s government is showing anti-democratic undertones. A Dec. 1 editorial by Haaretz editor-in-chief Alf Ben said this was part of a policy aimed at silencing dissent.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has never liked our coverage or our strong stance against his occupation and annexation policies and overall denial of Palestinian rights. Now, as his political minions seek to delegitimize and strangle us financially, we are not the only ones in the government’s crosshairs.
However, the government’s decision is probably justified. The government is not trying to shut down the newspaper, just saying it has no intention of continuing to fund it with public funds.
Democracies also have the right to protect themselves from those who seek to harm democracy under the guise of freedom of expression. Haaretz can continue to criticize Israel as long as it wants, but many Israelis do not view Haaretz’s activities favorably, and in fact, have the opposite view, so they are willing to fund Haaretz. There’s no need.
In my opinion, adopting the narrative of those who seek the destruction of the Jewish state crosses a line that should not be crossed. Therefore, the Netanyahu government, which has vowed to protect the country and its people and is in the midst of a violent conflict, is justified in withdrawing financial support in this way.
